primary function. >> sure. you can see on slide number five -- three, i think this is. >> four. >> four, sorry. >> that is three, yes. >> slide number four, you can see from the total contacts, the correct number of folks that had contacted us for a second opinion or that we could help them with a second opinion was 509 cases, so 509 unique cases. and then also, sometimes when members call us, they do want a second opinion but it's not appropriate to get a second opinion because many of the folks that are turned away and we can't really help them with the second opinion services because it's no longer relevant, sometimes people want this second opinion to be done post-mortem, so that they can go back and make a case for mistreatment, and so we don't

provide that because what best doctors intends to do is try to provide the right treatment going forward and not after the fact. so, sometimes people may want to get a second opinion, but it's after they have already had a procedure done. >> other questions. >> i have a lot of comments about this. first of all, it's not free, it's 1.40 per member per month, adds over $1 million to the rates. talking about a looming excise tax and i don't understand how you know your diagnosis is better than the other doctor diagnosis. 509 cases open, 413 closed. unless you follow the case for a long time down the road you won't know whether your diagnosis was better than the other person's diagnosis. and we already have this service available to us. if a member has a certain problem, they can get a second opinion and a face-to-face opinion with another doctor. as far as i know. i know people that do it.

and if they don't, i know that h.s.s. would probably help them facilitate that, and those particular cases. so, and these are not face-to-face visits, and you are looking at the same stuff that the other doctor looked at. and i just, i just think that this is a duplication of services and i have a few other things, but it's getting late. i just don't -- also don't see why you think these are the best doctors. the bay area has the best doctors, really, some of the best doctors. >> yes. >> so, they can already go to them. they don't have to go through you. and anyway -- >> one of the thing best doctors focusses on, two things. the virtual part of it, people don't have to go anywhere and repeat another visit with another physician if they already have their medical records and the clinical notes.

>> there's nothing like a face-to-face from everyone you talk to, to look at the patient. >> sure. >> and that makes a huge difference rather than just looking at a bunch of papers and stuff. that's missing here. >> sure. of course it's going to be missing from a virtual visit, yes. the other part of a virtual visit is you are taking away any kind of geographic limitations, so if somebody, you are right. we have a lot of physicians from the bay area that are in the best doctors experts database. i have seen them because i've seen a lot of the requests come through. but also there are other specialists who are considered, you know, the premier, most knowledgeable or working on some research or, you know, on the clinical edge of whatever they are doing, i'm not a clinical person, i can't really express this. but they might have access to more knowledge in certain circles and they might be located in the southeast, and it takes away that limitation is

basically what it is. >> all right. are there other questions from the board, director griggs. >> i would like to make a statement for the purpose of the minutes, h.s.s. will go back and look at savings and costs reporting. it is one of the performance guarantees that we have with best doctors for february, i believe. so that is coming and we will work heavily getting it appropriate to present to the board. second thing, go through the reporting, too, and look at refining some of the labels on what's on the report to further clarify for some of the things brought up. but it is and what i have heard and the member interaction i've had, it is at this particular point in the existence with h.s.s., one of the peace of mind things that people feel confident, more information or different, you know, from a different source, or some networks or some integrated h.m.o.s limit where the second

opinion can come from, too. so, you know, this is an area where i see it's benefitting. we will go back, the department will go back and provide this additional information. >> thank you. public comment on this topic? public comment? all right. >> yes, hi, i realize this is atypical, speaking as an h.s.s. member, not as an employee of the health service system. i'm speaking because i am somebody who recently utilized the best doctor second opinion service. i heard a few comments here and as somebody first-hand experience the service what it meant for me. i did get a somewhat serious diagnosis for me, cardiology related, and there was, i'm with kaiser, so my second opinion options were all in the network of kaiser or my mother did want me to go to see her cardiologist. and that was going to be completely out of pocket, and

very expensive. so i thought i would avail myself of the services that we provide to our members. and i did open up a case. i ended up with an hour telephone call with a cardiology specialist at the cleaveland clinic. i don't know when in my life i'm going to get an hour with a cleaveland clinic cardiologist, and that conversation was very helpful to me. when we talk about risk factors, when we talked about how do you define success, that was not a conversation i had had with my kaiser doctor, they are like giving me percentage of success rate and even my service system, we talk about how, you know, people have to advocate for themself, ask the right questions and it's so difficult. and so to commissioner sass, or commissioner follansbee, it's not cost and peace of mind. i have to tell you, i got peace of mind out of my experience and i did go through the procedure

and it was costly, so if you are going gonna look for cost savings you are not going to find it on my particular claim. but what i'm hoping is i will continue to be a productive and effective member, employee of the city and county of san francisco, and health services system and that service to me meant the world. >> all right, thank you for your comment. any other public comment? >> my name is diane erlick, i used the best drs., i'm a kaiser member and also cardiology. in kaiser you are limited. you can go do any kaiser doctor but it's the kaiser line that you hear when you go to a kaiser doctor. and i used best doctors and i found it extremely helpful and

it did result in a change of medication that i am much more pleased with. so i think it is very valuable. >> thank you for your comment. any other public comment? hearing and seeing none, we are now ready to go to our next item. >> item 12, discussion item, presentation of q3 express dashboard, marina coleridge. >> oh, sure, now i have to collect myself and play this other person. >> i understand. i started to say we could defer this to the next meeting, but i dared not without permission from director griggs chlth. >> the first time we have presented -- marina coleridge, back in august of this year, was the first presentation of our new express dashboard where we are really trying to, on a

repeatable, recurring timely basis bring integrated dashboard that looks performance across all three of our health plans. in last month board materials we did provide the dashboard through q2 of 2017. that was a very packed agenda. so, we did not actually list it as an agenda topic, as well as i knew we would have the q3 one available by the january meeting to be more timely. we have a present station, gov tv. -- a presentation. >> knowing that this is a late hour. >> yes. >> and that the material is dense in terms of how it's presented, i would ask that you provide thematically the

information on the succeeding slides or key points. you have done a great job of putting down kind of some key footnotes and so forth, but i think that in order for us to get the best understanding of what you've taken time to collect here, we need some highlig highlight guidance. >> certainly, i will not read the dashboard notes, they are the same notations we provide each time. there are two dashboards in the deck, one looks at the nonmedicare population, so active and early retirees, and then we repeat some of the dashboard components for the medicare population, and that does not have the financials in it. looking at page 2 of 9 for the nonmedicare population, these members are all trending pretty consistently, when we look at

previous period for your med and rx spend, while that is down over the dashboard that you saw in december, we are slightly trending upwards, and i don't think that's really any surprise. i think we've gone from a spend of 599 million, up to 606 million, high claim costs also very consistent, if you go back over the last couple dashboards and look at those numbers. slight uptick from q1, but otherwise all these members are holding steady. our cost per employee per year, which is found on page three, this, over the course of 2017, has also been increasing. a total allowed amount of 12 thousand 9 hundred $0.82 per employee per year. that's trending up about 1.7% as

we look at slide four -- >> ask one -- i'm sorry, make sure i'm clear. the total, is that sort of, you know, in each of these graphs, is that the, like under high cost claimants overview, so the h.c.c. allow amount per patient, the total is higher than any one of the three components. so that means that we allow into the contracting more than any of the claimants? i'm confused what the totals are supposed to be. >> please be clear as to which slide. >> slide two, under high cost claimants overview. for example, a number of high cost claimants. the total, it's close but not

exactly the number, the three components. but allowed amount per patient med and rx, and blue shield, 128,759, city plan, 106,000, kaiser 126,000, but the total 129,137 which is higher than any of these three component health plans. so, i'm just -- i don't know what the total actually means. >> yeah. i'm going to have to go back and look specifically at the code behind that. i believe it's going back out and recalculating without putting a plan on there. and so we have additional dollars that end up showing up for some cobra and other utilization, and i believe it ends up in the total, but it's not ending up in the blue shield

city plan on kaiser, because now this gets technical silly, but we the health service system owns the eligibility feeds into this. the claim feeds from the health plans and they can marry up to our eligibility, we don't have the cobra people. and because of that, some of the dollars drop off. but when you go to total, you are not restricting the data and doing other things, so it will pull it back in. i suspect it's that piece making numbers like this look a little odd, i'll confirm that to you by the next board meeting. >> thank you. >> i guess my question, somewhat similar, when i see a number like 129, is that an average? versus a total number? >> it's an average, it's a per patient. >> i'm just wondering if total is the right. >> total column, i see what you mean. yeah. >> can't be -- i think, it can't be an average when you add 128,

106, 126 and weight it for the number of enrollees per plan. can't be any greater than any one of the three columns. >> i understand. >> i thought you were talking about the specific measure, the per patient, averaging out over population. i see where you are going. >> that's just a question. >> with the terminology there. we will clean that up. >> you were on page three. >> i believe i was shifting to page four. >> fine, thank you. >> i was done, wasn't i? >> cost and utilization trends. >> yep. cost and utilization trends. what you'll notice on here, kaiser is the only plan that's below the western norm and significantly so, but what i want to call out for you is that western norm which is what's available to us in the apcd, is compiled by really looking at p.p.o. data, and so it's not an ideal norm to use, because it's

somewhat misrepresenting, but we have struggled and in ernest are constant sly trying to find a proper benchmark so that we can really see how our plans are performing based on what our reality is. we are looking at some other modifications that might actually make us sort of create our own norm, all things cost money, though, it's a decision where you are spending your budget dollars. i did want to call that out. so, more than anything, i look at the west norm to get some general idea, but looking longitudinally what's going on with the numbers. and of course, the plan performance in the middle of this page, my personal favorite. done as an annual update. this tries to do a ratio by the average by looking at the risk score, which again, still the

dxcg methodology other people have mentioned instead of list being it in the -- they scale it to 100, that's why they see 106 for blue shield, normally read it as 1.06 risk score. and then a note as you read through and absorb the data, premium contributions, because they are based on the medical premium and as you know from other budget conversations that happen today, embedded in the medical premium, you have, for example, the $3 p.m.p. under sustainability and doctors and other items embedded in there. chronic condition prevalence on slide 5 of 9. really important to us in continuing to look at what sort of information can we use to look at both the quality and also help provide some information into our wellness

programs. these, i'm pleased to report, trending downward. in the short-term, up ticks, hypertension, diabetes, low back. but where we were at the end of 2016, dropping down in terms of our per 1,000. >> and preventive screenings, the next one. >> and what i would like to call out on the next slide, six again, we don't necessarily have perfect data, but always said if we waited for perfect data, we would never have anything to look at and evaluate and inform where we needed to go. and so on these, for example, you know, if we look at kaiser screening weights, around 90% on the cervical and the mammogram and the colon cancer. those in here are not set to the

measure which exists in the engine we have to pay for to make happen, it should be every two years versus one year, just a look at the year and where we are looking at, get a sense of are our members taking advantage of the preventive screenings, do we see variability by plan, just a caution how we are consuming this information. and lastly, i know stephanie presented last month in terms of where she's at with her wellness programs and i loved that piece about the score of 75 on the overall well-being, the number of population, drives to a lot of other good things. the bottom left, 72.4% of our population are sitting in healthy and stable, and that's where we want to keep them. no news to any of you, 1.9% of our members are driving 40.1% of

our costs. so, we want to stop our members from getting over to further right along the risk band profiles, and point of note on the top ten summary groups, hepatitis has dropped off of that, and looking at some episodes and some costs, and so -- and other than that, no other specific notes on your commercial population moving quickly, since it is late in the day, to the medicare dashboard, page 2 of 6, once you get into the medicare section of this document, i would like to say this is one of the first ones i've had a chance to look at since we have incurred data now moving into the 2017 year. it is -- it is rolling 12 months, so when jeanette from

blue shield was talking to you about the early retirees with blue shield and the average age, if you are trying to crosswalk to this and you see 72 years on this, and wondering why, 12-month rolling, so i still have six months of those medicare blue shield members in here. so, just so you are not thrown off by that. and also maybe some of the six months, the risk scores are looking really kind of whacky here, both blue shield and city plans spiked significantly. so, we'll bring back, some further analysis, positing possibly some of the healthier blue shield medical retirees have moved out to the p.p.o. product and what was left in blue shield was some of our sicker individuals which is driving up the risk score, but also the city plan score spiked from 315 at the end of incurred december 2016, up to 497. we did not have time to get into

that level of analysis before the board meeting. we'll bring back and see what we are noticing there with our medicare population in those particular categories. and just some notes on chronic conditions. same thing we are seeing in our nonmedicare population, a lot of these are dropping down. i do need to do some similar analysis to your question, commissioner, about why the total was higher. we see that here with the hypertension patients per 1,000, each of our plans, the numbers have dropped on our patients per thousand on the prevalence but the total is higher than what it was previously, we'll look at that and bring that back to you as well. and those are primarily the big call-outs and are there any other questions that i can attempt to answer for you? >> all right.

any questions from the board? any public comments? >> i -- i appreciate very much your, appreciate all this very much. particularly the preventive screening rates, to put that into perspective. i was taken aback by how low they are. but when you clarify they are not linked to the guidelines, not everyone needs a colon cancer screening every year, maybe every five years, so i don't know if there needs to be an anecdote, you know, to say these are not -- these are just overall. looks like we should be, we shouldn't be comparing one health plan to another because the populations are different. particularly above, you know, in the premedicare. if i understand that correctly. >> yeah. >> because, and so not so discouraged. pay a lot of money to have such a low mammography rate, so -- but if it's not -- is --

>> and also looking at trying to actually incorporate the measure in there. thank you commissioner. >> mike, do you have something to add here? >> mike clark. this data does cross plan years, so one member could represent in multiple columns. so for instance on page 2 of 9 of the nonmedicare data, if you add up the sum of high cost claimants, 58 people may be in multiple columns, because of this spreading across two plan years. >> ok. all right. thank you for that point. any public comment? hearing and seeing none, now going to come to our end game very quickly. >> yes. item 13, discussion item, report on health and network plans, if

any. >> all right. please, any plan representatives that have something that they wish to share. >> kay kiepler, kaiser permanente. we are in height of the flu season and still encouraging all of our members to get flu shots. we have updated our website with flu information and continue to offer our flu shots at no cost and no appointment necessary, so, wanted to make sure that you knew that we are in the height of all of it, but there is still time for members to be able to go in and get the flu shots. >> thank you, i think that's very good given what's ahead of us. >> we know the flu shot did not accurately predict what's circulating in the influenza a. in the past, kaiser had protocol, diagnosis of influenza over the phone and in a certain period of time, i think 48 hours, prescription is sent

directly to the pharmacy so they can get started on treatment. are these kinds of protocols still in existence? and what's your supply of medications, also seeing reports that flu drugs are in short supply. >> i've seen different reports on the news as well. i would have to check to see what the protocol is this year for -- i don't know if we are releasing prescriptions over the phone without a visit. but i can certainly find out if we, what the protocol is this year. >> seems like your education should be known with the flu vaccine, and what to do if you think you have the flu, not to expose everyone at the medical center at the same time adequately treated and rapidly. >> absolutely. each medical center is addressing it in an appropriate way, depending on the volume. so, in those urgent cares and

emergency that are seeing high volume and there are some, it's quite overwhelming in the community, they are setting up locations for just patients with flu symptoms to be seen to keep them away for patients there for a sprained ankle. the next thing you want to do is infect everyone if they are not coming with it. they are through phone services, through other communications, we have a call center, outbound calls, where appropriate able to prescribe medication, they are doing that. i have not gotten notice we are out but there are certainly limits and what we have received more is that others are out ab starting to send those nonmembers into our emergency rooms, which as you know, we can't turn away anybody who comes to an emergency room because they are out of

medication. so, it's one of the things we do really well, we are a very large system and can move things around quickly. but it is a command center activity and each one of those medical centers that are close to capacity or have significant. last week in southern california specifically, where i think it's been a bit of a bigger hit so far, they -- we were close to capacity last week. it's gotten slightly better this week. and so what we also do in that situation is we look at nonurgent scheduled surgeries, for example, and postpone those by a week or two, to make, to ensure that we have enough beds and enough staff to cover those urgent needs that come in. >> all right. thank you. >> thank you. >> any other plan representatives? >> i just want to make a comment. >> commissioner breslin. >> to united health care, i wanted to say complaints from

members about harassing phone calls still, and, we just received this nice mailer, and then addition i got another letter and i called the number, will you please call us, we are trying to reach you, i called and they took about ten minutes, they could not figure out why they sent whoever was on the phone sent out the mailer and i had to go by then. it's ridiculous. i really would like you to come back and say how much is it costing to do this. >> we would be happy to do a presentation to the board. >> and you know, it's like -- we want to come into your house so you can prepare for your doctor visit. >> yep. >> all right. >> but it's over and over again. >> shannon with united health care. we'll be happy to bring something back. >> coordinate that through director griggs and director in terms of timing. all right. is there anything else on this

item, public comment? hearing and seeing none. next. >> item 14, discussion item opportunity to place items on future agenda. >> items for future agendas. hearing and seeing -- commissioner breslin. >> united health care, co-pay for urgent health care is $35, medicare advantage plan. $10 more than blue shield and kaiser is only $20. so, i think for next month, you know, and we'll have this for an ongoing question about why this is more than everybody else, especially when you can afford to send out all the mailers, you can bring down the cost. >> we are just beginning the renewal cycle. i was going to bring a couple items to director mitchell's, or acting director mitchell griggs'

attention. recommended changes where we are seeing some complaints. add that one to the list and definitely price a lower co-pay into -- >> and another thing, physical therapy co-pay is so much more than acupuncture and a chiropractor, i don't understand, especially since physical therapy is covered by medicare and the other two are not. not only your plan, but others. and i don't understand that. and you know, chiropractic and acupuncture are passive service, i mean -- therapy. compared to physical therapists. i don't understand why the difference in the price. that's just for the future, it's not just for your plan. >> all right. we'll take those two points under advisement. united health care has made a commitment to have a discussion during the regular rates renewal process. thank you. any other items for future agenda, hearing and seeing none, no public comment, we'll now move to item 15. >> discussion item, opportunity

for the public comment on any matters in the board's jurisdiction. >> any comment on any matter the board's jurisdiction, by anyone. hearing and seeing none -- i see -- we do have -- all right. >> what we have noticed and actually gayle bloom brought up the issue of her bills, we have noticed a problem with sutter billing and have a number of retirees that have bills that are several years old now, and they have been trying to get them resolved. they have been sent to collections for like $20 or $25. and they have gone back to united health care, back to blue shield, then they have been referred back directly to sutter

and sutter says yeah, we see you paid that, but there's nothing we can do about it. we can't fix it, can't change it and the member is saying but i'm being taken to collections, you need to tell your collections agency that that's resolve and take that out of there. we can't really do that, so we have members being penalized and it's really gone back to sutter billing. it's not united health care, they have done whatever they can do. i've spoken to our staff a number of times at health service and they are limited in what they can do, and members are saying, i'm still sitting here with a collection notice of a payment that i'm not obligated to pay because it was paid two years ago, and it's not relevant to anything. and so i don't know what can be done, but maybe we can make some kind of inquiries, but sutter seems unwilling to adjust some of their practices in the

billing units to clear up accounts and members are then going forward with ultimately collection notices and i think this is not acceptable for our members. so, whatever we can do to try to mitigate that. >> to try to get this on a path for correction or inquiry, it would be helpful, i think, to try to get some specifics and it may -- >> we know who they are, and so does the staff. >> all right. so, i think we need to take those that we have and then use that as the means to begin a conversation and partnership about the health plans around these issues as a way to unravel this, ok. >> absolutely. thank you very much. >> thank you. any other public comment? hearing and seeing none, we stand adjourned until next month. thank you. -

>> san francisco is known worldwide for its atmospheric

waterfront where spectacular views are by piers and sight and sounds are xhanl changing we come to the here for exercise relax ball games entertainment, recreation market, exhilaration a wide variety of contributions easily enjoyed look up the bay the waterfront is boosting for activities boosting over 25 visitors every year the port of san francisco manages 7 may have million dollars of waterfront from hyde street and fisherman's wharf to the cargo terminals and name

shoreline the architecture like pier 70 and the ferry building is here for the embarcadero and a national treasure the port also supports 10 different maritime industries alongside with the recreational attractions making san francisco one of the most viable working waterfronts in the world but did you think that our waterfront faces serious challenges if earthquake to damage the seawall and the embarcadero roadway rising seawalls will cause flooding at high tides and major repairs to a safe many of the piers the port is at a critically turnl point time to plan for the future of san francisco's

waterfront this year the port is updating it's marts plan the plan working group to invite a wide variety of poichdz from the city and bayview and other advisory teams to share their expertise if intense and maritime operations the waterfront land use plan has guided the use and development of the lanes for the last 20 years major physical changes take place along the waterfront and now is the time to update the waterfront plan to continue improvements that will keep our waterfront vibrate, public and resilient the biggest challenges facing the waterfront are out the site an aging seawall along the embarcadero roadway and seawalls

that will rise by 21 hundred to provide and productivity of tides seawall is built over weak soils and mud the next earthquake will cause it to settle several feet without the urgent repairs that will damage the promenade and other things we've been fortunate over the last hundred years less than one foot of seawall over the next hundred years scientists say we'll have 6 feet of seawall rise imagine the pier 30/32 will be floated, the embarcadero will be flooded our transportation system is fog to be heavy impacts unfortunately, the port didn't have the financial resources to repair all the deteriorating piers let alone the adaptations

for sea level rise. >> it is clear that the port can't pay for the seawall reinforcement or deal with the sea level rise on its own needs to raise money to take care of the properties at take care of the maintenance on the properties no way absent anti funding the issues of sea level rise or the schematic conditions of seawall can be development. >> as studies talk about the seawall challenges the working group is look at the issues please come share our ideas about recreation, pier activities, shoreline habitat, historic preservation and transportation issues and viral protection. >> we know this planning process will not have one question and one answer we need the diversity of the opinions how people feel about san

francisco waterfront and want to hear all the opinions. >> the challenges call for big decisions now is the time to explore now and creative ideas to protect and preserve san francisco waterfront. >> now is the time to get involved to help to shape the future of our waterfront. >> we need the debate please come forward and engage in the process. >> this is your waterfront and this is your opportunity to get involved be part of solution help san francisco create the waterfront we want for the future. >> this is really to dream big and i think about what our waterfront looked like for all san franciscans today and generations to come. >> get involved with the planning process that will set the fraction for what is coming at the port. >> find for in upgrading dates

on the ports website. >> (ship blowing horn in distances) >> good morning, everyone. and happen see new year. welcome to the january 10th, 2018 regular meeting of the neighborhood safety and public services committee. i am supervisor hillary ronen, chair of the committee. to my right is supervisor sheehy, and to my left is

supervisor fewer. the clerk is john carroll, and i would like to thank nona from sfgovtv for attending. can you please call item number one. >> agenda item number is to consider the type of a type 48 general item on sale to la ciudad club, doing business as the city club will serve the necessity and convenience of the city and county. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much. >> good morning, supervisors. you have before you a pca for city club. they have applied for a type 48

license transfer, and if approved, this would allow him to sell on-site beer, liquor and spirits. there are zero letters of protest, zero letters of support. they are located in plot 414, which is considered a high crime area. mission station has no opposition. aou approved with the following recommended conditions. sales-service of alcoholic beverages shall be considered only between the hours of 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. all days of the week. no noise shall be audible at any nearby residence. number four, petitioners shall actively monitor the area and control in an effect to prevent the loitering of persons on any property adjacent to the

licensed premise as depicted on abc 253. it should be noted the applicant has agreed with all the above recommended conditions. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much. any questions? no. okay. thank you, sergeant george. and i understand that the applicant, janice belen, is here. >> good morning, and i'm not used to speaking in front of people like this, but thank you for the opportunity to present myself. i've been at 2150 for 31 years, and my main concern as a mother and grandmother is always for safety, you know, and i'm very inconvenienced by the move because i've been displaced by big developers. and at first, i was pretty upset, but then, when i started to think about it, it's a move

in the right direction, simply for the fact that it's going to cleanup the area more because when i was younger, i got out there, and i fought tooth and nail. i got beat up, my car was vandenbe vandalized and everything. my school was right behind there, and that was a safe haven for the children. i had a sign on the door. i don't know if you're familiar when ethel newland held the meetings, to let them know if they were being bullied to they could come in. my doors are always open, because sometimes you can see crime across the street from my videos. i will continue for the safety.

you know, and i'm hoping that this gentrification. in fact i'm sure it will. it'll take a while for them to grasp it, but thank you for hearing. it's a business for me, it's not a lifestyle. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. i'd like to open this up for public comment. if any member of the public would like to speak, now's your chance. seeing no one, public comment is closed. colleagues, do you have any objection? seeing none, this item moves forward with full recommendation to the board. >> thank you. >> supervisor ronen: mr. carroll, number two.

. >> we have for you a puc report for city beer store. they already have a type 42 license, and they are also transferring to another location, and if approved, this will allow them to sell on and off-sale beer and wine. there are zero letters of protest, zero letters of support. they are located in plot 208, which is considered a high crime area. they are in census track 176.01, which is considered a high saturation area. mission station has no opposition. lou approved with the following recommended conditions. number one, sales service of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted between the hours 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. sunday through wednesday and 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. thursday through saturday. number two, no noise shall be audible at any nearby

residence. number three, petitioners shall aptly monitor the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons on any property adjacent to the licensed premises as depicted on the most recent certified abc 253. number four, sales service and consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted in or on the patio area only between the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. each day of the week. number five, sales and service of alcoholic beverages on said patio area shall be restricted to waiter-waitress service and only to patrons seated at tables. number six, when the said patio area premise is being utilized for service, sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, a premise employee shall be in attendance and maintain continuous supervision at all times of the said area. it should be noted that the

applicant has agreed with the above listed conditions. >> supervisor ronen: thank you very much. seeing no questions, i understand that the applicant, craig leisen, is here. >> hello. >> supervisor ronen: hi. >> so is my wife, as well, beth. just briefly, i have our letter of intent to abc. still kind of explains a little bit more of who we are, if you have any questions. we have been in south of market for ten years and operating as we intend to in the new space. we're also kind of a -- we were very happy to be where we were on folsom street, but our rent went up went substantially. so the great news about it is we're able to stay in the city, but in the neighborhood. we're moving two blocks away.

i think our track record speaks for itself. also the space is exciting. has been vacant for at least two years, and there's a couple restaurants, if it's not too far away from here, that unfortunately didn't work out, so we'll be able to occupy a space that has been vacant for quite a while in south of market on mission street. we also have some support -- we have support of the neighbors, co-workers, and even some people in the industry. you're more than welcome to talk -- if you guys have questions, at the same time, but if you just want to expedite the day, i think they're content to show their support. i thank them for being here. if you have any specific questions for the community, they're here, as well. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. do you have any questions. i do see some people waving in the audience. i do want to open this up for public comment. if you'd like to comment forward, anyone and speak on this item, now is your chance.

seeing none, public comment is closed. >> thank you very much. >> supervisor ronen: thank you very much and would you like to make a motion? >> supervisor: sure. i move to forward this to the board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor ronen: without objection, this item moves forward to the board with full recommendation. >> clerk: number three is an item on antilgbtq hate crimes. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. and i want to apologize to everyone here. we had to continue this from the last meeting that went long, so i want to thank supervisor sheehy for everyone involved in that. supervisor sheehy? >> good morning, colleagues. i have called a meeting to discuss antilgbtq hate crimes here in the city. we recently learned that hate

crimes in california have jumped 11.2%. in the bay area specifically, there were 60 more hate crimes in 2016 as compared to 2015. san francisco was among the bay area cities with the highest reported numbers. hate crime victims include victims, businesses, government entities, and religious organizations. although we know that hate crimes are often motivated by the victim's race or religion, they are also motivated bisexu by sexual orientation and gender. president trump has blatantly attacked the lgbtq community. he's attempted to ban transgender military service

members. remove all mention of the lgbtq people from their website and include august lgbtq people from bathrooms. building a wall between us and mexico and the elimination of gender identity from the census. his administration does not value inclusiveness or diversity. sadly this has allowed people to commit acts of violence against members of our community, especially or lgbtq community. i want to thank the departments that are here on this item, especially cheryl davis the executor director of the human rights commission, claire farley who the mayor has just appointed -- mayor lee had just appointed senior advisor on transit issue, and district attorney gascon's chief of staff, christine dubarry.

>> good morning, supervisors. thank you for...thank you for the opportunity, thank you, supervisor sheehy for calling for this hearing. it's -- one of the things that we've been discussing a lot is the idea of underreporting, right? so the other thing that really concerns us is this idea that people aren't aware that they can make a report or they're afraid to, and so this -- for us, one of the big things will be after it's all said and done, the idea, and hopefully, the possibility to think about the outreach and awareness campaigns that we can do and know your rights.

so i'll just quickly go through some things. i'm not going to take up much of your time because i do adjust want to say again, the report we have is from 2015, and one of the things we should also think about is data collection and analysis and how we can be intentional about funding that, and again, the idea that we know that a lot of people don't feel comfortable coming forward. that report was something that people spent time to go out and meet directly with folks and get feedback and not wait for them to come in and report. so for us to be a little bit more vigilant about what we're doing around the front end and what we're doing about awareness and education, so i just want to make sure we highlight the work that the hrc is doing, the areas of focus and the work that happens. the discrimination division is where we have investigators who, when people come in and make complaints, they follow up

and do the investigation and mediation if need be. but again, one of the problems that i'm seeing is we aren't having enough people come in to actually file complaints, so we want to be much more proactive to make sure that people know that that is something they can do. another is around policy. we have different ordinances that have been done in the past. we have some things with dph, but we want to make sure that we're working on policy and making sure that it's relevant to community needs. and then, the advisory committees that we have, the lgbt advisory committee, and just our community empowerment work that we've been doing. so the discrimination complaints, as i mentioned, that's happening, and we're very happy to have join our policy unit, but also will be helping us with some of the discrimination division, aria sayeel, who's going to be

working with know your rights opportunities, to make sure that people know that they can come in and we'll help them through that process. we're doing professional developments and workshops. we have some of the against hate campaign, and some of the partnerships around funding, and in that respect and love toolkit, highlights some of the work that we've had in that regard. and i will be saying we've been doing many for school visits and presentations in different places. you actually have before you one of the curriculum guides that we worked on with university of san francisco and other places, and i highlighted the princess boy book that we've been using. and we're also working with our family coalition to do more intentional curriculum that can be used in schools, as well as after school programs, and helping identify more books and

resources that folks can have to do more on the front end, versus waiting for people to file complaints. so the vice prevention needs assessment was done, as i mentioned, in 2015, and the assessment looked at the things that are identified on the slides that you have. i won't read through them. but again, that was done in 2015. we would really like to see us being more consistent with that and to be able to do more -- that more often, so that's just something to think about, so that we're not, again, waiting for people to come in and file complaints to decide what the needs are, but that we can be more intentional and do this, if not annually, at least biannual to get feedback from folks and get a better understanding that's not just based on the reports that we're getting, but that's based on real community feedback. and it will give us something to measure and look at. if we can do something in this next year, it'll allow us to look at whether there's been an

increase or a decrease in some of the complaints. >> supervisor ronen: and is there anything preventing you from doing that automatically or is it a resource issue? >> funding. resource issue robe rope is that something you're looking for in your budget this up coming here. >> so we will seek to probably do that, but one of the issues is we've all been given charges to decrease our budget, and so it's just something that we'll have to think about in terms of the scope of everything and hopefully during the budget process, we can find a way to identify funds from that. >> supervisor sheehy: yeah. we should look at that. given the environment that we're in, the trend isn't downward. >> right. >> supervisor ronen: and this project, i remember, came out of an ad back, my former boss, supervisor campos, and so we need to make sure that that's baselined, and we keep it going. >> i think the actual should be kept going, and i